Just after Apple won an initial ruling barring the sale of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Europe, it has been revealed that the iPad maker has filed a similar lawsuit against Motorola regarding its Xoom tablet.

In the judge's decision issued in a German court in the Samsung case this week, one passage revealed that Apple is engaged in two additional lawsuits with iPad competitors. One is a local German company named JAY-tech, while the other targets Motorola and the design of the Xoom, according to Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents.

Apple is said to have filed a lawsuit against Motorola in Dusseldorf, the same court where it just found success in blocking the sale and advertisement of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1.

That Apple is engaged in a legal showdown with Motorola is not new: Motorola fired the first salvo last October when it accused Apple of violating 18 patents related to a range of technologies including 3G, GPRS, 802.11 wireless and antenna design. Motorola has also sought to invalidate 11 iPhone-related patents owned by Apple.

Apple responded to Motorola in kind that same month with a lawsuit that accuses its rival of violating patents related to the multi-touch interface of the iPhone. In December, Apple added 12 more patents to its lawsuit against Motorola.

While those previous lawsuits pertained to mobile phones, the latest complaint in Germany is the first indication that Apple has also taken issue with the Motorola Xoom, which competes with its own iPad. It is not known whether Apple's complaint against Motorola seeks a preliminary injunction similar to the one it was just granted against Samsung.

Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 is now banned from sale in Europe after the preliminary ruling went in favor of Apple. The Cupertino, Calif., company has accused Samsung of copying the look and feel of its iPhone and iPad, and violating patents related to their design.

Similarly, the launch of Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 has also been delayed in Australia, where Apple also won a key preliminary legal decision. Samsung has said it will announce a new date for the launch of its 10.1-inch tablet "as soon as is practicable."

Last month, Motorola revealed that it shipped 440,000 of its Xoom tablet last quarter, a number well behind the 9.25 million iPads Apple sold in its last quarter. There have been indications that Motorola is planning the release of a successor to the first Xoom in hopes of boosting sales against the iPad.

This week, Motorola Mobility CEO Sanja Jha indicated that his company plans to sell new tablets with "aggressive form factors" later this year. But he also indicated that smartphones remain a top priority for the company.

So is this about trade dress, or what? Is this the same kind of thing as with Samsung? Or is this something else?

(Because Samsung was really blatant compared to this. Granted, the Xoom does look like somewhat like an iPad, with the rounded corners and glossy black bezelwhich you could say are obvious, except theres a million other ways to make a tablet look, and yet so many iPad-followers really do choose to look like iPads. Would the Xoom have that same look without the iPad coming first? No. Look at Android phones: most ape the iPhone, but not all dothere are other ways to style a touchscreen device.)

Is it the number of patent lawsuits between tech companies is going up, or just the reporting of them, because it seems that more lawsuits are being reported than rumors of upcoming Apple products.

I had the same thought. What I think is happening is that the chickens are coming home to roost. The wheels of justice grind slowly and the effects of Apple's stepped up efforts to defend it's IP, promised when the first iPhone came out, are only now beginning to take effect.

"aggressive form factors"? What the heck does that mean? Does it mean aggressively different (tacitly admitting their copying on the first one) or aggressively copying (a continuation of what they already have done)? I agree with others that the Xoom was less guilty than others. But since it was pretty much a failure anyway, any victory by Apple will be more one of principle than effect.

Just after Apple won an initial ruling barring the sale of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Europe, it has been revealed that the iPad maker has filed a similar lawsuit against Motorola regarding its Xoom tablet.

In the judge's decision issued in a German court in the Samsung case this week, one passage revealed that Apple is engaged in two additional lawsuits with iPad competitors. One is a local German company named JAY-tech, while the other targets Motorola and the design of the Xoom, according to Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents.

Apple is said to have filed a lawsuit against Motorola in Dusseldorf, the same court where it just found success in blocking the sale and advertisement of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1.

That Apple is engaged in a legal showdown with Motorola is not new: Motorola fired the first salvo last October when it accused Apple of violating 18 patents related to a range of technologies including 3G, GPRS, 802.11 wireless and antenna design. Motorola has also sought to invalidate 11 iPhone-related patents owned by Apple.

Apple responded to Motorola in kind that same month with a lawsuit that accuses its rival of violating patents related to the multi-touch interface of the iPhone. In December, Apple added 12 more patents to its lawsuit against Motorola.

While those previous lawsuits pertained to mobile phones, the latest complaint in Germany is the first indication that Apple has also taken issue with the Motorola Xoom, which competes with its own iPad. It is not known whether Apple's complaint against Motorola seeks a preliminary injunction similar to the one it was just granted against Samsung.

Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 is now banned from sale in Europe after the preliminary ruling went in favor of Apple. The Cupertino, Calif., company has accused Samsung of copying the look and feel of its iPhone and iPad, and violating patents related to their design.

Similarly, the launch of Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 has also been delayed in Australia, where Apple also won a key preliminary legal decision. Samsung has said it will announce a new date for the launch of its 10.1-inch tablet "as soon as is practicable."

Last month, Motorola revealed that it shipped 440,000 of its Xoom tablet last quarter, a number well behind the 9.25 million iPads Apple sold in its last quarter. There have been indications that Motorola is planning the release of a successor to the first Xoom in hopes of boosting sales against the iPad.

This week, Motorola Mobility CEO Sanja Jha indicated that his company plans to sell new tablets with "aggressive form factors" later this year. But he also indicated that smartphones remain a top priority for the company.

Most of these lawsuits are about a product that looks similar, or the user interface has similar controls in the same place. It's a good thing we don't apply the same logic to the automobile, or the steering wheel, brake pedal, and headlite control would all be in a different place on on each manufacturers models. A Ford looks a lot like a Toyota if you are looking at shape, size and location of the doors and windows. Software patent laws need to be changed!

Same form factor. in HP's case, far more alike than either the 10.1 or the Xoom. I think Google might be right - in part.

I originally thought Apple was concerned with Samsung copying look and feel too closely. Now it looks like simply producing a tablet may attract Apple's lawyers.

Sorry, but in my view this looks more and more like Apple intends to litigate itself to an untouchable market presence. The bigger they're getting the more dangerous they're looking to me. Until they lose one or more of these ("look and feel"?) lawsuits, anyone who wants to build a smartphone or tablet needs to allow for lots of legal fees no matter how little it actually looks like an Apple product.

I think it's more of a shot across the bow the that Patents that have been collected aren't just there for bragging rights.

There's a bit of a problem with vendors that like to use "free" software. Their profits require that they expend the least on R&D and they'd like nothing more than to be able to have other companies provide design insight.

He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.- SolipsismX

Same form factor. in HP's case, far more alike than either the 10.1 or the Xoom. I think Google might be right - in part.

Except for the main point, they are litigating instead of innovating. They are the only ones innovating. There has not been any innovation in any of these tablets since the iPad. The most innovative tablet released since the iPad is the iPad 2. Do you care to think what tablet will come next on that list?

I think it's more of a shot across the bow the that Patents that have been collected aren't just there for bragging rights.

There's a bit of a problem with vendors that like to use "free" software. Their profits require that they expend the least on R&D and they'd like nothing more than to be able to have other companies provide design insight.

The only part that's free is the OS. Motorola, HTC. etc. still have to do the same hardware development that Apple does, along with their own tweeks to the software for their interface customization and/or certain specific features. I suspect they all have the same general device costs considering units sold.

Most of these lawsuits are about a product that looks similar, or the user interface has similar controls in the same place. It's a good thing we don't apply the same logic to the automobile, or the steering wheel, brake pedal, and headlite control would all be in a different place on on each manufacturers models. A Ford looks a lot like a Toyota if you are looking at shape, size and location of the doors and windows. Software patent laws need to be changed!

But they do apply the same rules. Do some research of patents held by all the automakers.

I think it's more of a shot across the bow the that Patents that have been collected aren't just there for bragging rights.

There's a bit of a problem with vendors that like to use "free" software. Their profits require that they expend the least on R&D and they'd like nothing more than to be able to have other companies provide design insight.

There is no patents involved in Samsung and Motorola suits in Germany, is only a community design problem.

Most of these lawsuits are about a product that looks similar, or the user interface has similar controls in the same place. It's a good thing we don't apply the same logic to the automobile, or the steering wheel, brake pedal, and headlite control would all be in a different place on on each manufacturers models. A Ford looks a lot like a Toyota if you are looking at shape, size and location of the doors and windows. Software patent laws need to be changed!

The flaw in your logic is that the location of the steering wheel, brake pedal, and headlight control is more or less regulated by the federal government.

Most of these lawsuits are about a product that looks similar, or the user interface has similar controls in the same place. It's a good thing we don't apply the same logic to the automobile, or the steering wheel, brake pedal, and headlite control would all be in a different place on on each manufacturers models. A Ford looks a lot like a Toyota if you are looking at shape, size and location of the doors and windows. Software patent laws need to be changed!

They do, a Ford can resemble a Toyota but it won't look like a Porsche.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.

So much for the field of industrial design. No point in spending time and money creating something beautiful and functional when your competitor takes your product to a fabricator and says, "Make me 100,000 of these, but put my logo on it."

I originally thought Apple was concerned with Samsung copying look and feel too closely. Now it looks like simply producing a tablet may attract Apple's lawyers.

Sorry, but in my view this looks more and more like Apple intends to litigate itself to an untouchable market presence. The bigger they're getting the more dangerous they're looking to me. Until they lose one or more of these ("look and feel"?) lawsuits, anyone who wants to build a smartphone or tablet needs to allow for lots of legal fees no matter how little it actually looks like an Apple product.

By way of example apple tried it on here in objecting to the registration of a mark for the supermarket chain Woolworth's. The similarities between apples and Woolworths marks were striking. Only the most hardened apple fan could have conceived that objection to have been reasonable.

Except for the main point, they are litigating instead of innovating. They are the only ones innovating. There has not been any innovation in any of these tablets since the iPad. The most innovative tablet released since the iPad is the iPad 2. Do you care to think what tablet will come next on that list?

What is your definition of innovation. Seriously there has been alot of innovation outside of the ipad. Look at the asus transformer or the tablets that added things they believed consumers would like, such as full size usb, hdmi, workable flash in a mobile device? Or is your definition of innovation tied to the amount of tripsvto the patent Office?

Funny how tablets were made BEFORE Apple released the iPad and now all of a sudden this question starts popping up. Gee, I don't know maybe make them like before? Or spends some time and money and actually innovate and figure it out yourself instead of mimicking someone else's work?

Funny how tablets were made BEFORE Apple released the iPad and now all of a sudden this question starts popping up. Gee, I don't know maybe make them like before? Or spends some time and money and actually innovate and figure it out yourself instead of mimicking someone else's work?

Isn't that funny? Tablets were made for years before the "Giant iPod Touch". The were months of jokes and all of a sudden, those jokes don't see so funny any more.

Why not make something like that Dell Flip or one of those numerous Tablet PCs? I know why.

Except for the main point, they are litigating instead of innovating. They are the only ones innovating. There has not been any innovation in any of these tablets since the iPad. The most innovative tablet released since the iPad is the iPad 2. Do you care to think what tablet will come next on that list?

Isn't that funny? Tablets were made for years before the "Giant iPod Touch". The were months of jokes and all of a sudden, those jokes don't see so funny any more.

Why not make something like that Dell Flip or one of those numerous Tablet PCs? I know why.

Only the Giant iPod Touch is selling.

Exactly. This talk about "stifling innovation" is pretty much bunk because there is very little innovation in mimicry. Jumping on a successful bandwagon to save a couple bucks doesn't look like innovation to me.

I totally understand the suite against the Samsung Galaxy S, but more because of the software than the hardware.

IMO Samsung modeled the TouchWiz UI off iOS in order to profit off the iPhones goodwill (i.e. a customer walks into a store, looks at the TouchWiz UI and thinks "that's just like my friends iPhone only cheaper... I'll get that one").

The Galaxy Tab is more of a stretch. If you were dumb, and I mean really really dumb bordering on mentally deficient you *might* confuse a Galaxy Tab for an iPad as long as you didn't turn it on or turn it to the side or back.

There is no way someone is going to think a Xoom is an iPad though, regardless of how stupid they are.

The Galaxy Tab is more of a stretch. If you were dumb, and I mean really really dumb bordering on mentally deficient you *might* confuse a Galaxy Tab for an iPad as long as you didn't turn it on or turn it to the side or back.

There is no way someone is going to think a Xoom is an iPad though, regardless of how stupid they are.

It's not just about confusion, though that's part of it. It's about copying the major aesthetic choices in such a way that a very distinctive product starts to become a commodity.

This is a particular problem for Apple because their aesthetic is so minimal, as a result once it's copied by everybody else they don't have a lot of options for changing it while staying within their existing design language.

Apple is trying to push the other OEMs into developing their own distinctive design languages. Some elements may be the same, but when almost all of the elements are the same for almost all the vendors something is clearly wrong.

It's not just about confusion, though that's part of it. It's about copying the major aesthetic choices in such a way that a very distinctive product starts to become a commodity.

The Xoom doesn't copy any major aesthetic choices that are unique to the iPad.

It's doesn't have a unibody design. If you look at the back the camera/speaker are in their own cutout area with the power button. It's also missing the Apple's unique single round button.

Not only is the screen ratio different but the screen rotation is different. The iPad is geared around portrait mode (dock and "Apple" button at the bottom, power button on top) where the Xoom is totally geared to be landscape (dock is on the "side", power button at the back and all the labeling is all landscape).